Letters to the editor -- Published March 19, 2014

Wednesday

Mar 19, 2014 at 12:01 AM

After almost 40 years of involvement with Pacific football, there have been many great days and many fond memories. And there have been the three sad days for me: when Coach Chester Caddas left, when the university dropped football and now the demise of our beloved Memorial Stadium.

After almost 40 years of involvement with Pacific football, there have been many great days and many fond memories. And there have been the three sad days for me: when Coach Chester Caddas left, when the university dropped football and now the demise of our beloved Memorial Stadium.

I have been involved as a water boy, student equipment manager, president of the Quarterback Club and the Pacific athletic fund drive.

For many of us, the announcement to knock down the stadium was a shock. It would have been nice if the university had spoken of its plan for the land first. It would have been nice if the university had found a way to reinstate football and keep the stadium.

Because of its current condition, there is no question the stadium has to go. Maybe it would not have to be knocked down if the administration had paid more attention to this valuable icon of Pacific and the community.

And, by the way, the new plans are really nice and good for our sports program. The new facilities could still support a football programs that makes sense if so desired.

With the destruction of our lovable Stagg Stadium, the history and memories of Tiger football will fade.

It is a sad day for many Tiger football players. Goodbye, Stagg Memorial Stadium, we will miss you.

George Retamoza

Stockton

I have made at least three calls to Senator Cathleen Galgiani's Sacramento office seeking the reason why the Stockton Democrat voted for SCA5, but have received no reply. Maybe I will through an open letter to her:

Dear Sen. Galgiani:

I am writing to understand your reason(s) for voting yes to SCA5.

SCA5 is designed to repeal voter-approved Prop. 209 so that the state-owned public education systems can use race/ethnicity as a criterion for college admissions. By voting for this bill, you imply college admissions should be based on skin color rather than merit. I can't imagine a person as intelligent as you would truly believe that.

Here are my reasons for voting no on SCA5:

1. There is no restriction that prohibits qualified minority students being admitted into University of California campuses.

2. It opens the door for discrimination based on race and/or gender. It is a huge step backwards in civil rights.

3. It opens the door for the state-owned institutions to sneak in otherwise unqualified candidates into UC and California State University systems.

4. It places truly qualified minority students in an awkward position since they will be viewed as a product of preferential treatment or reverse discrimination.

The American dream should only be limited by one's efforts, not his/her race/ethnicity or gender. This is what America really stands for. We want our children to build their life based on their merits and hard work and not their DNA.